Anyways, be cautious when reading books on writing. And I'm not just talking about being aware of false information!
About a year ago I started writing heavily (After a few years of dabbling). I devoured book after book on writing -- All of them had great reviews -- and I learned a lot from them!
The problem? Too much information made my writing far too mechanical. Every time I wrote a sentence I had to ask fifty different questions:
Too many adverbs or adjectives? Bad sentence structure? Varied sentence structure? Structure that promotes emphasis on the right details? Word choice that promotes characterization and mood? Repetition? Advances the plot, or characterization? Is this word really needed?
And plenty, plenty more.
These books are great resources, but if you take in too much information at once, you'll find writing to be more of a chore than enjoyable. After quitting for around seven months I came back to writing. The result is that I'm no longer constantly questioning every word I write, and that my writing is much more fluid, creative, lifelike, and most importantly fun. As a result of this, rules be damned, my writing has more passion and is far more interesting to read.
Use those books, they are invaluable, but I caution you against overusing them.
This has probably been said a million times in this forum, and if so I apologize for regurgitating it. I just felt the need to throw my experience out there!
posted
I come and go on writing tomes and other rhetoric topics online (yep, library cataloguing indexes books on writing under rhetoric), get burned out, stifle for awhile, seek new insight and dig in again, let it ferment, try out a new insight in sketches, take a hiatus from trying and just let it out in free writing, let it settle in and then see if I'm making progress. Try my newfound knowledge out on a published test bench story. Drag out a trunk story and recast it, relinquish it back to the trunk, or completely start over again, maybe try it out again somewhere it's never been.
[This message has been edited by extrinsic (edited December 14, 2009).]
posted
The best book for writers I've ever read was The Right to Write; Julia Cameron. It was the 'freeing of the spirit' tome which really inspired me to be myself first (as a writer)... and just write!
quote; 'Be yourself, everyone else is already taken' C. Schulz
posted
Sounds to me like more the matter of tunring off your inner editor. That stuff is to be applied after the rough draft. Write anything you want in the first draft, just finish what you start. Then apply your book learnin'.
Other than that, we're never finished learning.
[This message has been edited by InarticulateBabbler (edited December 14, 2009).]
Or thinking about the works I know I should create.
the act of writing is fun, so I churn out drivel and be happy.
I will note that if I had my way, I would create works where every phrase, sentance, or paragraph would be something that a person would take pleasure of reading, alone or in the whole work.
Every time the urge to write like that comes over me. I shrug and drivel out another story instead....
posted
That's why I don't read books like that. That's why I didn't go study creative writing even though I knew I wanted to do it profesionally. I prefer to have a style of my own, one I worked to develope. I learn by writing and reading stories and see what works and what don't. I think that's the only true way to learn writing. How-to stuff is about getting results quickly. Well, quickly doesn't mean it's good.
Posts: 1271 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have to disagree... sort of. Writing books have been very helpful to me, but not in the way they intended. I understand how trying to follow their advice can lead to formulaic writing, but I never really followed their advice that way. Of course there were a few gems I picked up here and there (such as learning to recognize passive voice. I can't believe how much I did that before I learned what it was...) But overall books like that helped me to understand basic ideas such as characterization, plot, suspense, etc. I learned how to recognize good writing from not-so-good writing. It has helped me to recognize when I make mistakes in my own writing that otherwise may have taken me years to learn on my own, and in that sense have helped me to advance farther and faster than I otherwise would have (of course, reading my writing shows I still have miles to go before I... uh... sleep.)
That being said, I never really paid much attention to the books on sentence structure and grammar and so forth. I always find it odd that books for beginners focus there rather than on the larger aspects of writing, since sentence structure is, for me, the LAST area I edit. My beginning problem has always been plot and the major outline of the story. Once that is written, I look to polish each chapter, each scene, and make sure they are all in the right order and there is no better way to show things. Only then do I delve into the matter of sentence structure and so on in order to finally polish my writing. To do otherwise has always struck me as putting the cart before the horse while mistaking the forest for the trees and other such melanges of metaphors.
So I guess in a sense, I never considered the writing books acid fast rule books to follow, as if they were the bibles of published authors and I never could progress unless I followed them. Maybe I found them more valuable precisely because I didn't think they were very helpful... if that makes any sense.
posted
I'm with Terean. For my money, writing books need to focus on the big picture like characterization, plot, &c. I've never paid much attention to the ones that discuss style or sentence structure because I want to write in my own voice(s), not in someone else's. Not saying you shouldn't ever read that type of book, just that I think the most valuable information out of those books (e.g. passive voice, adverb craziness) can be gotten just as easily from critique partners and workshops like this one.
Posts: 715 | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
After reading "Characters and Viewpoint" by OSC, I wrote one of my best stories. It was the first one that got accepted too.
I think it's not a matter of reading them, but how seriously we take them. If we think of them as guidelines rather than rules I think we'll all be better off.
posted
I've been a guitar player for 40 (ouch) years. Took my first guitar lesson after 25 years(college... they MADE me do it). I can get around that thing pretty good... good enough that the high-end pros can't tell that I am self taught and really like the 'style' because it is unique and fresh to them. (not tooting my horn, just making a relative point) As a result of choosing this path my guitar playing remains one of my greatest joys in life... haven't made much money at it, I mostly teach younglings. I started my first real story 8 years ago and just burned lead and paper... every single day. I want to achieve the same thunderous joy with writing as I did with music, but I want to make money at it... alot would be great, a little would be great. With music I discovered the absolute necessity in knowing the technical stuff if I wanted to progress beyond being a 'string banger'. Once I studied music theory it all changed and the sun rose over the horizon. I thought I was already in the daylight. The little bit I've read in OSC's writing lessons has been having that same effect, as well as the feedback from... (ahem) Ya'll. I am from Texas after all. Writing is an art. What I hafta do is decide to what degree the technique should effect the art, without losing focus on keeping the art true... all the while remembering that an unsold manuscript is just that... an untold story.
IP: Logged |
posted
I'd recommend that you study technique in order to learn different ways to approach your writing. Some ways work for some writers, others for others; but that's also true for the same writer with different stories.
The thing is, you can study technique without so much as touching a how-to-write book:
1--select a story that you really admire (and are willing to sacrifice to your study, because you will run the risk of hating it before you are done)
2--read the story straight through at least three times without reading anything else in between (except, maybe, posts on Hatrack and the newspaper and your mail, depending on how long the story is)
3--by the third time, you should be able to see all kinds of techniques that the writer used, even if you don't know what they are called
4--alternative approach would be to go through the story once with several colored pencils, each one used to indicate some aspect of story writing that you are looking for (can be stylistic things such as -ly words, saidisms, etc or can be more general things such as characterization, setting, plot turning points, etc)
The idea is to examine very closely something that worked for you as a reader, and know it well enough to be able to see the "seams" and understand what the author did to make it work for you.
quote:I think it's not a matter of reading them, but how seriously we take them. If we think of them as guidelines rather than rules I think we'll all be better off.
Quoted for truth.
However I tend to agree with Gan. I've only read a couple of books on writing and I noticed the same effect, initially.
As far as I can tell, most of them cover both sentence structure stuff and "bigger issues" since the two are interconnected.
I don't think anybody is saying don't read them, the thing is not to be ruled by them. But if you read a whole bunch at once, and they are all telling you how important this or that or the other is, it may tend to make it require quite a lot of effort to "shut off the internal editor." This is especially true if, like me, you usually only write one draft, try to get it how you want it in the first place, then polish it.
posted
I think I spent more time studying works I liked, to see what made them tick and what made them resonate for me, rather than books on writing. But I didn't really spend a whole lot of time on either...it was more of "I'll try this" than "I shouldn't do that."
Now, thirty-plus years on, I can read something and get a better feel for what makes it work than I once could...'course I'm less easy to please these days...
posted
This thread made me think of a book I read quite a while ago. I can't locate it on my shelves right now. Which means it may be in that room and inaccessible until sometime after the first of the year. It's about music, but I think it applies here, too.
The book is A SOPRANO ON HER HEAD--RIGHT-SIDE-UP REFLECTIONS ON LIFE AND OTHER PERFORMANCES by Eloise Ristad. The basic premise of the book is that music, as art, can be ruined by the wrong teacher. And while one teacher may be exactly right for one person, that same teacher may be horribly wrong for another. The title comes from a singer who was so messed up by her voice teachers that she couldn't sing in front of people at all. In order to get her to sing, the writer had to ask her to stand on her head. That was far enough outside all the rules that had been drilled into her that she was able to sing.
Edited to add: There's probably a story in that.
[This message has been edited by Meredith (edited December 14, 2009).]
posted
Reading is my lifelong passion, except for a dark time there while I was in college. From my first literature survey course onward, I feared my perpetual companions of the written word order were lost to me. The choice was default to freshman denial and minimalistically navigate my way through required literature courses or dig in and get to the heart of the matter. I chose the latter.
For six years, four undergraduate and post two years independent study, every story I read was read for insight, deconstructed to its most discrete components, vices and virtues, and techniques. Lo the horrors of favorites that didn't any longer stand up to my unyielding glare. New favorites that enjoyed preeminence for the puzzles they presented, until a new story's masterful craft engaged me. But it was work, not entertainment. Eventually, I came out the other side and could enjoy stories again, and came away with a new and deeper appreciation for what I read.
Literature study enhances my reading and writing experiences, Writing study enhances my reading and writing experiences. Editing enhances my writing and reading and literature study. But in the end, my reading experiences are more profoundly moving. My reading passion has been restored for all time. I believe even graduate literature and writing study wouldn't spoil it for me.
posted
Oh no, don't get me wrong. I love writing books. I just think if you're really trying to improve, it's important to learn slowly, as the information overload can lead to very boring stories.
The majority of books I've read focus on both the basic building blocks (sentence structure, word choice, etc), and the overall picture.
I've also done some of my best work after reading a writing book. It just wasn't after I'd read ten of them in a row
But hey, we all have our methods of learning. I just wanted to share one of my experiences, and how good things can be used in bad ways.
posted
Gan; You might want to read FINDING YOUR VOICE by Lex Edgerton. It deals with this very issue. I got such a kick out of one thing Mr. Edgerton said. I can't remember the exact wording but it goes something like this: "Read all the writing books you can and then do the opposite of what they tell you to do."... or something like that. He comes right out and says how too much overload through writing books can stifle your originality, your creativity, and the uniqueness that comes from your own personality and onto the page. He says to throw off the straight jacket and go for it. That the originality in a fresh new voice is exactly what most editors and agents are looking for.
Now that I've said that, I've learned a lot from the writing books sitting in my bookcase. Lots of good common sense advice, but I don't follow all of it, and I do bend some of the rules. BUT my writing has improved and smoothed out since reading them... and my largest contributing factor to my writing; The great folks here on Hatrack. They know their stuff, and have helped my writing bloom more than I could have ever imagined. My thanks to each and every one of you, in this regard .
[This message has been edited by Crystal Stevens (edited December 20, 2009).]
posted
I don't think I agree. I think EATS, SHOOTS & LEAVES (Lynne Truss) and ON WRITING (Stephen King) should be in the back pocket of any aspiring writer.
ON WRITING was great, one thing I learned from that book is Stephen King reads about 50-100 books a year (or 20 a month, or something like that). He reads anything and everything, and I really respect that.
Writers should read everything they can get their hands on, and that includes books on writing.
posted
I have been reading some writing books and right now, I am thinking most of what they say is pretty obvious. Of course, I have been reading hatrack for like 3 years and also took a creative writing course in college.
Posts: 303 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
My experience was when I first decided to change my life and get back into writing I read all of the Elements of Fiction Writing series, with the exception of Revision and Manuscript Submission since I had not written yet.
Then I started writing and forgot all about them. After the first draft of my first WOTF attempt the writing was all wrong. A couple crits came in, one from Inartblab, in particular, suggesting to read self-edit which reminded me to read Revision. I have read both now, and while reading Revision I had a major epiphany as far as my overall writing style. I rewrote the WOTF entry and, while still learning a lot, my writing has drastically improved.
My moral of the story is, that reading the books without context might have helped a little, but it wasn't until I was in the middle of writing that some of the points made in these writing guides really hit home.
My advice. Read, as was said, anything you can get your hands on. When you write, think about the objective, the effect you're going after. You shouldn't have a checklist of rules because most of them won't apply in any given situation. You want an effect you're reaching after. And you'll have probably only 2 or 3 key reader effects you'll be going for in any scene. I've found this focuses me on what's most important.
The rules help when you've identified what it is you want to do. Then you can go back and see which principles apply.
The next thing is to remember Pareto's Law, or the 80/20 rule (okay, so I used "rule"). Basically, in many systems, 20% of the factors make up 80% of the effect. 20% of the salemen make 80% of the sales. 20% of the car parts make up 80% of the defects. 20% of the writing principles make up 80% of what you need to deliver to the reader. Focus on what's important, critically important (think effects).
[This message has been edited by johnbrown (edited December 27, 2009).]
I love the idea that you renamed the "rules" techniques. Everytime I try to articulate on my sense of the concept, it comes out as formulae--which is misleading.
I think of writing as akin to martial arts, in that: There are many styles of martial arts, some flashy, loud, economic in movements, complicated in developing muscle memory, made for subterfuge or for health. All can be effective. None are better than the other. You can win just as many fights with a punch and a kick, as with a fancy lock or pressure point. The key to martial arts is not to master the formulae, it's to master yourself. The forms, katas, movements, steps are what you learn to know what you can apply, rather than what you must.
Jamie Ford mentioned earlier that some of the best advice he had was from OSC: We're storytellers first, writers second.
posted
Thats all basically what I've been on about more or less since I got here: its about achieving what you want to achieve with a story, and usually a lot of the "rules" arent going to actually help you do that.
Posts: 2626 | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's not to say you shouldn't learn the techniques, or practice applying them. And, I don't agree that a lot of the "rules" are useless or should be completely disregarded. As a painter, I use a Filbert most often, but I wouldn't give up my Fans, Chisels, Rounds or Flats--they all have purposes.
Posts: 3687 | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
You're right. You need all the techniques you can get. Need to understand as many principles of guiding the reader experience, transporting the reader, etc. as possible. Learn as much as possible. But the objective is the reader experience. This also means that if someone gives you a rule or principle and you can't see how it affects the reader's experience. Can't see how it affects yours. Then it has either a very narrow application or is a false principle.
Posts: 327 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:This also means that if someone gives you a rule or principle and you can't see how it affects the reader's experience. Can't see how it affects yours. Then it has either a very narrow application or is a false principle.
Agreed. But, by the same token, each writer has to determine which of these works for him or her, by themselves.
posted
I think the key is perspective. Many of the questions you pose as roadblocks appear to be the types of things one would look at during the final draft/polishing stages of a story. Certainly not the kinds of things one would juggle throughout the entire process, but arguably appropriate at the appropriate time.
I approach the story creation process by breaking it into three steps.
1. Concept-to-Sketch. This is where I start with the hint of an idea and come up with the faint outline of a story. I use outline figuratively because I usually don't do a real outline. For a short story this can include an initial rough draft.
2. Storybuilding/revision is where the plot starts coming together, characters emerge, the dramatic forces are put in place. Some initial editing decisions are made, but they are broad-brush (add/delete a character, kill/add a subplot, modify a plot, etc.)
3. Finalize and polish. This is where the final fleshing of the plot occurs, and all the handwringing over grammer and diction and style occur.
Since the beginning, I've immersed myself in books on writing. What I've found is that there is very little that is helpful to me regarding the first stage. The best advice I've seen is even if you don't have much of an idea/picture, just write something, even if you think it is bad. You'll have plenty of chances to improve it later. Get something on the page to work with.
The second step is where I've found books on writing to be the most help. Scenes, plot development, structure, character development, all those intermediate steps are primary topics for many writing books. None of the books are perfect or complete, so I'm not shy about selectively picking an idea or two for my toolbox. That's not to say the books contain errors, but people approach creative endeavors individually, and what works brilliantly as a technique for some might be an impediment for others.
There are also a number of books geared towards the final step, the various self-editing books, that I find helpful as references when I have trouble with style/punctuation points and final polishing.
The biggest problem I had the first year or two I made a serious effort to write was wasting too much effort trying to edit and polish drafts as I wrote them. It just bogged down the whole works. That's where the perspective comes in. During the earliest creative steps it's usually best to set all that book knowledge aside until the appropriate time.
I suppose I would encourage folks to keep reading on writing as much as they can because the wider the sample of views and approaches one encounters, the better, since there is no universally agreed to prescription for turning a handful of blank pages into a memorable story. But at the same time there is a lot of accumulated wisdom and experience out there.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
